Forum On Electronic Voting Leaves Many Questions Unanswered

(This is the latest installment in a series about how Newtown and the state are preparing to accommodate directives of the Federal Help America Vote Act [HAVA], and issues related to incorporating electronic voting terminals at Connecticut polls by the next Election Day.)

 

By John Voket

As six Democratic challengers for the secretary of the state prepare to present their views to the people of Newtown at a meeting set for July 14 at Edmond Town Hall, information forthcoming from Hartford on the review and selection of a vendor for the first wave of electronic voting machines continues to be sketchy.

A recent forum conducted by Connecticut Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz on the status of electronic voting implementation may have left many of the most important questions about the impending initiative unanswered. A voting technology panel entitled “Best Practices for Voting Machines in Connecticut” was held on June 15 at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford.

According to a spokesperson for the secretary of the state’s office, the forum was arranged to hear from elected officials, local election officials, advocates for persons with disabilities, and technology experts regarding their thoughts about best practices for new voting machines as required under the Help America Vote Act. The goal of the activity was to discuss different practices and ideas regarding voting machines in order to make Connecticut’s voting systems and the public’s voting experience the best in the nation.

The panel included Ms Bysiewicz; State Senator Don DeFronzo, Senate GAE Chair; Mary Stanton, executive vice president of the Registrars of Voters Association; Sandra Hutton, president of the Town Clerk’s Association; Enid Orseman, president, League of Women Voters of Connecticut; Jim Dickson, vice president, Government Affairs of the American Association of People with Disabilities; Chris Kuell, Connecticut Federation of the Blind; Jim McGaughey, executive director of the Office of Protection and Advocacy for Person’s with Disabilities; Dr Ted Selker, associate professor of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab and MIT Director, Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project; and Dr Michael Fischer, professor of Computer Science at Yale University, and a board member of True Vote Connecticut.

During remarks preceding the discussion, Ms Bysiewicz told the audience, which included dozens of state registrars of voters and town clerks, that any details about an ongoing evaluation process for the first machines to be obtained through federal grants her office accepted would be off limits.

“We are under strict purchasing rules,” the secretary of the state told the audience. “The [CT] Department of Administrative Services is in charge of the request for proposals, evaluations and procurement [from computer voting machine vendors]. We can’t discuss those evaluations during the process of reviewing the bids.”

Implementation

Delayed Until ‘06

Ms Bysiewicz said the state was poised to acquire 771 electronic voting machines as part of the first phase of implementation under the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA) legislation. That federal legislation in part provided $32 million in grant money to the state to purchase handicapped accessible equipment that was initially planned for use in November. A spokesperson from the SOTS office said in a statement that when the RFP was issued, the initial timetable set by that office was to have the machine selected and purchased by the end of the summer so that local election officials could be trained on the new machine in time for their use in the municipal election.

“Since that time, however, our office has revised the timetable,” the statement read. “We anticipate taking the qualifying machines to each Congressional District for the public tests in the fall. The machines will then be purchased to comply with the January ’06 deadline.  They will not be purchased for the ’05 municipal election.”

The statement went on to say that Ms Bysiewicz wanted to devote as much time as is necessary to training all local election officials on the new machines before they are put into use – thus, the change in schedule.  The secretary who spoke at statewide conferences earlier this year, told members of the Registrars of Voters Association, Town Clerks Association and the League of Women Voters about the new timetable and the switch from 2005 to 2006.

During the forum, the secretary of the state assured attendees and panelists that training would be provided by the vendors and that training stipulation was one of many requirements that were to be included in the RFP. Ms Bysiewicz also told The Bee in a recent interview that she was planning, for the first time in state history, to solicit the input of voters from across the state about which of the qualifying machines were most effective and easy to use.

“Once those final suppliers are qualified, we plan to conduct workshops in legislative districts across the state so the voters themselves can tell us which machines they like the best,” Ms Bysiewicz said.

Ms Bysiewicz also lauded the subsequent passing of Senate Bill 55 and its companion house bill, which assures a voter verified paper ballot would be required on each vote cast. Those paper records would not only provide voters with the verified proof that their vote would be registered as they cast it, but would provide the first of several means to conduct physical recounts if problems with any machine, precinct or even the entire statewide network developed.

While computerized voting would be a new concept to state residents who have up to now cast votes from local referenda to national Presidential elections on extremely reliable mechanical machines, several towns in Connecticut have experienced great success as part of a pilot program utilizing electronic voting technology.

Middletown Town Clerk Sandra Hutton, a forum panelist and president of the state Town Clerk’s Association, said her town has been testing electronic voting technology in local schools since 1999.

“In 2003 we conducted a pilot program with voters themselves,” Ms Hutton said. “It was an absolute success. We need to move forward with this technology.”

The Middletown official said that in her experience, education about the intricacies and operation of the equipment was most crucial, but once potential voters were comfortable with the devices, the entire voting process, especially at the end of an election, was expedited.

“The tally at the end of the night was quick and efficient,” Ms Hutton said. “It took only about one-third the time of a regular election [in which current manual machines were used].”

Registrars

Remain Concerned

Richard Abate, who is the president of the state Registrars of Voters Association said that once the RFP review was completed, and decisions were finalized, his main concerns involved user-friendliness and accountability.

“It’s very important to all registrars,” Mr Ababte said. “They want technology that is easy to operate and dependable.”

He reminded the panel that the current electronic machines used in the pilot program were not compliant with HAVA requirements, and that he was concerned with the state’s rush to comply with federal deadlines.

“There are new technologies emerging as we speak,” Mr Abate said. “I’m afraid that we may invest in a machine that will meet compliance, but that will become quickly obsolete.”

Mr Ababte echoed concerns expressed by Newtown Town Clerk Cynthia Simon, and registrars of voters Karin Aurelia and LeReine Frampton about the burden of cost once HAVA grant money is expended on the first phase of implementation.

“Yes the money is there today to buy these machines for towns, but it won’t always be there,” he pointed out.

Ms Bysiewicz has come under fire from members of TrueVote Connecticut, a statewide grassroots organization that hopes to ensure the best technology is delivered to Connecticut voters. That group has called for the secretary of the state to throw out the current RFPs and to reopen the process so companies that have brought new technology to the fore since the RFP process closed, can have a chance to be considered for the state.

Since she formally declared her intention to run for the Governor’s office, Ms Bysiewicz has seen no fewer than six contenders among her party faithful, who have expressed interest in a Democratic endorsement to fill her place on the ballot next November.

Those six contenders will be on hand during a Democratic Town Committee event Thursday, July 14 at 8pm in the second floor meeting room at Edmond Town Hall. At least one of the candidates, John Nussbaum, appears to favor optical scanning technology for the voting machines.

In a recent opinion column Mr Nussbaum wrote for The Bee, he states that to date, Connecticut has put out a request for proposals and received only bids for electronic voting machines.

“Unless the secretary of the state’s office acts immediately, the lead time necessary to deliver optical scanners and optical scan ballot marking machines for next year’s federal election will expire,” Mr Nussbaum concluded.